ism_list_classifications

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Description adds value beyond annotations by disclosing 'Static data, no database read' and explaining output structure (parallel lists). Annotations already have readOnlyHint=true, but description provides concrete behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Very concise, two sentences plus a code-like explanation of the data structure. No wasted words, purpose is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Tool has zero parameters, high schema coverage, and output schema exists. Description explains output format and relations to siblings, which is fully adequate for this simple tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

No parameters exist, so baseline is 4. Description adds meaning by detailing the output structure and interaction with sibling tools, which is helpful for understanding return format.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states it returns 'classification vocabulary as parallel lists' with explicit mapping between canonical and friendly terms. Verb 'Return' is specific to resource, and it distinguishes from siblings by mentioning which sibling accepts which form.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use this tool vs alternatives: ism_applicable accepts either form, ism_list_by_classification accepts canonical only. Also clarifies static data with no database read, guiding appropriate usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.